Friday, June 13, 2014

So, which side really enables the gun violence?

7. The primary goal of gun regulation is to save lives by separating guns and violence. Federal and state laws regulate who is allowed to possess them, the circumstances under which they can be carried and discharged in public, certain design features, the record-keeping required when they are transferred, and the penalties for criminal use. The goal is to make it less likely that criminal assailants will use a gun. The evidence is clear that some of these regulations are effective and do save lives.

8. Gun violence can also be reduced by reducing overall violence rates. Gun violence represents the intersection of guns and violence. Effective action to strengthen our mental health, education, and criminal justice systems would reduce intentional violence rates across the board, including gun violence (both suicide and criminal assault). But there is no sense in the assertion that we should combat the causes of violence instead of regulating guns. The two approaches are quite distinct and both important.

Perhaps, a better term for the movement should be the "gun regulation" movement, especially since the first words in the Second Amendment are; "A well-regulated".

FYI:
Kristin A. Goss is Associate Professor of Public Policy and Political Science at Duke University. She is the author of Disarmed: The Missing Movement for Gun Control in America. Philip J. Cook is ITT/Terry Sanford Professor of Public Policy and Professor of Economics and Sociology at Duke University. He is the co-author (with Jens Ludwig) of Gun Violence: The Real Costs. Kristen A. Goss and Philip J. Cook are co-authors of The Gun Debate: What Everyone Needs to Know.

Author's common failure to understand the history of the 2nd Amendment leads to erroneous solutions offered. "A well regulated......" militia meant, at the time, citizens who were well prepared, disciplined, competent and able to fulfill their militia duties as citizen soldiers. The meaning at the time had nothing to do with current usage, being restricted, controlled, inhibited, etc, etc. This misinformed author joins a large number of other commentators who have made the same basic error in their lack of understanding the history of the 2nd Amendment and what it meant at the time when the Amendment was constructed.

7) restated, make it a hard as possible to own a legal gun so that only criminals and government will be armed.8) being a criminal is a respected job and should be encouraged by protection from actions of their victims

What you conveniently leave out in your sarcastic nonsense kinda way, is that practically every gun used in crime started out the lawful property of someone. Your inability to prevent gun flow into the criminal world screams out for stricter laws, not as you said, so only criminals will have guns, but exactly the opposite, so that they won't.